The comic itself while enjoyable and the meaning is overall pretty clear. However in relation to the article as it's source the comic is rated against that pretty much falls flat on its face cause it missed the point of the article.

Also the panel with fluttershy cosplayer looking for the guy's cutie mark is really messed up when it comes to how the face was drawn. It is really over exaggerated to the point where it looks creepy and not human. Certainly an area for improvement.

OK, fair enough. He's a sexist asshole. But not in the way the comic is suggesting. So I think my criticism of the comic still stands. He's sexist because he chose to make a big deal about their appearance, and implied it had something to do with their worth as a person. What he ISN'T is a "Geek Gatekeeper" who accuses women of being posers based solely on their gender.

OK, fair enough. He's a sexist asshole. But not in the way the comic is suggesting. So I think my criticism of the comic still stands. He's sexist because he chose to make a big deal about their appearance, and implied it had something to do with their worth as a person. What he ISN'T is a "Geek Gatekeeper" who accuses women of being posers based solely on their gender.

Yeah, agreed. So long as we can agree he's an asshole I don't mind what kind we think he is.

I thought the comic was funny just for the pure ridiculousness of it. That being said you watered down your message by mixing it with MLP since most of the people in here won't read the linked article.

As for the article itself ... isn't superficially judging people by their "geek cred" and constantly trying to "out hipster" each other one of the communities greatest past times? In fact I can only think of a couple of forums where newcomers aren't treated with hostility. I guess "6 of 9" sounds a lot like "n00b" to my ears.

OK, fair enough. He's a sexist asshole. But not in the way the comic is suggesting. So I think my criticism of the comic still stands. He's sexist because he chose to make a big deal about their appearance, and implied it had something to do with their worth as a person. What he ISN'T is a "Geek Gatekeeper" who accuses women of being posers based solely on their gender.

Isn't that the whole point?When has a dude been accused of being in the gaming community or going to a con for attention?Ever?

That guy has no right telling anyone what to do or assuming what other people's motivation is based on things like looks and gender.

ThriKreen:People seem to keep missing the point of the original article. It's not about how much geek cred one has, people are totally fine with varying levels of interest.

It was about the posers who have no interest in the subject at all.

Yeah, I think the authors of this strip did too. I read the comic. I read the description below it. I read the linked article. I read the description again. Then I wondered what the fuck they were insulting the author of that article for. What they're insulting him for isn't what he even said in that article. Looking over this thread, I'm glad I'm not the only one who's confused by this.

Geo Da Sponge:It's just... Even if you agree that there are women who purposefully dress up for conventions in order to get attention (which I doubt anyway; for money, yes, for attention, no) even though they don't care about nerdy stuff, why does that give you the right to mock their appearance?

I know I keep rambling back and forth here, but I just stare at that article and it seems to drip misogyny, despite (and partly because) of how frequently he dips into phrases like "it's not all women" and "some of my best friends are women".

One could read the original blog response too, but as with many in the comments, the author missed the point of the original one too. Granted, the source probably could have been written better, I will give you that.

Basic point is, that while yes we can't judge everyone who cosplays in skimpy outfits as attention whores, someone eventually will want to talk to them (whether to hit on them, or just talk about what an awesome Emma Frost they make). But there's that realization once you DO start talking to them where they're totally disinterested in you, the con, the subject, and just don't really care, they just want to see the flashes and crowds.

It's like ticket scalpers or people who buy as many limited editions as possible to sell on Ebay later, but have no idea what the comic is about, they're just there to milk money (or in this case, attention) from people, and starve it from more deserving people.

Looks like one more reason for me to not watch MLP, not to dump on those of you who do. Some of the fans are quite, shall we say, off-putting. I watch Adventure Time, though, because it's F^$@ing bonkers, and awesome.

To be fair, Bronies, you know, adult men calling pink ponies "cute" and a variety of names one should only use about, well, humans, and preferably real people, deserve almost all sarcasm and mockery heading their way.

I'll be the first to admit that there are ridiculous forms of fandom in anything. Gaming itself is pretty silly. But the amount of Bronies that I've even seen posting here, describing their love for fictitious ponies, and how they'd totally "date" them, it gives me enough creeps to last a lifetime.

We could lump them together with the furries and put them on an island somewhere, that would solve a multitude of problems.

I don't know how that guy wanted to sound, but he comes off as a grade A douche from what I'm reading. So what if they are only there to cosplay and socialize? Their reason for being at the convention is just as valid as anyone else's.

I can't decide if the fact I understand the reverse satire is good or bad, though mainly I'm just bitter about all of it because gender is still a big thing. That and I have to be reminded in my slipping faith in humanity every day.

I think Im in love with this thread already. There are so many ways to interpret the comic and so many implications, not least for the authors possibly using ponies to stir the pot some and rack up some hits, that this thread could function as a fully fledged sociological experiment.

The hate, counter hate, opinions and thoughts are going to make this an interesting night for meme and internet cliche collecting. Let the games begin!

SpiderJerusalem:We could lump them together with the furries and put them on an island somewhere, that would solve a multitude of problems.

Speak of the devil :P. And you move this thread one step closer to invoking Godwins law. Someone is bound to call that some kind of -ism. Maybe a fash? Who knows.

SpiderJerusalem:To be fair, Bronies, you know, adult men calling pink ponies "cute" and a variety of names one should only use about, well, humans, and preferably real people, deserve almost all sarcasm and mockery heading their way.

I'll be the first to admit that there are ridiculous forms of fandom in anything. Gaming itself is pretty silly. But the amount of Bronies that I've even seen posting here, describing their love for fictitious ponies, and how they'd totally "date" them, it gives me enough creeps to last a lifetime.

We could lump them together with the furries and put them on an island somewhere, that would solve a multitude of problems.

i'm a brony and i do love MLP but not in the same sense that you seem to be implying...

i know to difference between reality and fiction and don't aspire to date a fictional character. Sure there are those in the brony community that like sort of thing, but generalizing the whole fan base for what a small part of it does is pretty shallow-minded

Basically, the comic is making a point about male geeks who respond to females at Cons, particularly attractive ones that defy the usually "geek" stereotype, with unwarranted hostility.

The point they're making is this: How would you feel if you liked something stereotypically girly like My Little Pony and everyone harassed you or thought you were an attention whore because of it? That's how girls often feel when they show up at cons, despite being genuinely interested in nerdy stuff.

Yeah, the comic's drenched in sarcasm and satire, so it's a bit hard to understand.

At first, I thought the women in the comic were just a bunch of gay men (not that there's anything wrong with that). To the artist of this comic, I think you need to give them more defined curves or soemthing, because this is not the first time I've made that mistake.

Either way, I am now looking forward to the MLP episode on sexual harassment. Unless it happens to Fluttershy, in which case I will be permanently scarred.

Basically, the comic is making a point about male geeks who respond to females at Cons, particularly attractive ones that defy the usually "geek" stereotype, with unwarranted hostility.

The point they're making is this: How would you feel if you liked something stereotypically girly like My Little Pony and everyone harassed you or thought you were an attention whore because of it? That's how girls often feel when they show up at cons, despite being genuinely interested in nerdy stuff.

Yeah, the comic's drenched in sarcasm and satire, so it's a bit hard to understand.

This isn't helped by the fact that there is a majority male component to the 'Brony' community. There is also the fact that they are actively looking to welcome more female fans to make the community look a little more well adjusted and so don't function like a 'typical' convention crowd.

I'm not saying the point isn't valid or even cleverly made but it would have worked better with a gaming convention setup rather than a pony one. It just seems a little... off in its current form.

There is also the fact that any male 'Brony' who was sexually 'harassed' by three women dressed as part of the mane six probably wouldn't mind. Like at all.

Did anyone actually read the text underneath the comic? It pretty much spells the point out for you; that this shit happens all the time to women, where women geeks and gamers for some inexplicable reason have to 'prove themselves' that they're not just posers. It's bullshit, pathetic misogynist crap.

Geo Da Sponge:It's just... Even if you agree that there are women who purposefully dress up for conventions in order to get attention (which I doubt anyway; for money, yes, for attention, no) even though they don't care about nerdy stuff, why does that give you the right to mock their appearance?

I know I keep rambling back and forth here, but I just stare at that article and it seems to drip misogyny, despite (and partly because) of how frequently he dips into phrases like "it's not all women" and "some of my best friends are women".

One could read the original blog response too, but as with many in the comments, the author missed the point of the original one too. Granted, the source probably could have been written better, I will give you that.

Basic point is, that while yes we can't judge everyone who cosplays in skimpy outfits as attention whores, someone eventually will want to talk to them (whether to hit on them, or just talk about what an awesome Emma Frost they make). But there's that realization once you DO start talking to them where they're totally disinterested in you, the con, the subject, and just don't really care, they just want to see the flashes and crowds.

It's like ticket scalpers or people who buy as many limited editions as possible to sell on Ebay later, but have no idea what the comic is about, they're just there to milk money (or in this case, attention) from people, and starve it from more deserving people.

Well okay, so they do exist. I didn't have enough experience with cons myself to comment, I just felt that it sounded a little unbelievable to me. Apparently I was wrong, although I still kind of think a few bits of anecdotal evidence aren't proof of a widespread problem.

But still, I don't like the idea of acting like you have to create some kind of geek Inquisition to reject the eeevil wannabes. It's a public space (assuming they paid to get in or whatever else), and it's not as if they're drugging vulnerable nerds to be carried off for some kind of sick experiments. What precisely is the problem? That you feel these wannabes are so hypnotising that entire swathes of the nerd population will be swayed by their wiles? That they'll hurt your feelings by being rude about the things they're dressed up as?

I just don't think it's worth the trouble you'd create by treating every attractive woman at a convention with suspicion. And I especially don't think the guy who wrote the original post is the right guy to talk about it, since he seems to be an arrogant, judgemental prick. He can say he's not talking about 'proper' nerd girls until he's blue in the face, he still used the "out of 10" scale in the same article as saying that he's attracted to brains over looks. After implying that women are worth less if they're lower on the scale, too.

Basically, the comic is making a point about male geeks who respond to females at Cons, particularly attractive ones that defy the usually "geek" stereotype, with unwarranted hostility.

The point they're making is this: How would you feel if you liked something stereotypically girly like My Little Pony and everyone harassed you or thought you were an attention whore because of it? That's how girls often feel when they show up at cons, despite being genuinely interested in nerdy stuff.

Yeah, the comic's drenched in sarcasm and satire, so it's a bit hard to understand.

This isn't helped by the fact that there is a majority male component to the 'Brony' community. There is also the fact that they are actively looking to welcome more female fans to make the community look a little more well adjusted and so don't function like a 'typical' convention crowd.

I'm not saying the point isn't valid or even cleverly made but it would have worked better with a gaming convention setup rather than a pony one. It just seems a little... off in its current form.

There is also the fact that any male 'Brony' who was sexually 'harassed' by three women dressed as part of the mane six probably wouldn't mind. Like at all.

Yeah, it probably would've been better with something that isn't notable for it's surprisingly huge male fanbase, like Barbie or something. He was probably trying to make it more relatable and/or attract more hits by alluding to Bronyism.

And I doubt you could ever really convince men that being sexually harassed by a woman is a very bad thing because our culture dictates that sex is something a woman generously gives and a man is happy to get, no matter the circumstances. That's an issue for another day. though.

My god. That comic actually reached critical mass levels of lampoon and sarcasm. I actually genuinely believed it had actually happened for a good few minutes there >< Tangently, should I feel ashamed for finding the cigar chomping one kind of cute?

On the actual topic at hand, having just read the article linked under the comic does raise some fair points, and the OP has missed that point. It's not about some elitist jerk juding you based on "geek cred" it's about /those/ sort of women that go to conventions, just so they can seek attention, because they imagine the stereotypical geek being there (which do exist), and feel empowered, because they KNOW that a lot of the men there will be infatuated with her being there. It's cruel and out of order as far as I'm concerned, you don't see me going to places where I envision underconfident, desperate women being just so I can feel superior.

Not only that, there is a large section of the article stating that calling women out to be judged on their geekiness in some asinine system is awful as well, so I'm not sure what the point is regarding the article.